What requirement would you add (or delete!) from the application process to medi

[Frazier]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I think there should be a limit on the amount of schools people can apply to in a given cycle. Of course, this will never happen because there is just too much money to be made by the big players in the game.

...But limiting each applicant to 12 schools would really streamline the process, I'd imagine, from the first step of verification (some people are getting secondaries, some aren't. Common reason: schools have to verify all the apps they got. just wait it out.) through the ending stages of the waitlists (what often comes with tons of applicants? a huge waitlist. Just ask anyone that applied to Rochester before lol).

The current rule of "apply broadly" would be more in line with "apply within your scope of competition".

From the applicant side, we would be forced to apply more realistically, and, while we might have to bear the burden of making less "hail mary applications", the benefit would rest in saved funds, saved time, saved stress and saved uncertainty.

 

[milski]

this is would be the single worst idea in the history of bad ideas.

anways, the Physical sciences section can go die in a fire, so that should be removed from the application process. I'd rather have them keep the writing section and get rid of the physical sciences section.

I'd rather they did the opposite. And wait... guess what's happening starting Jan 2013! 😍

 

[Fivo]

Change the FAP/Financial Aid requirements by recognizing independent student status as FAFSA does in college

 

[TheWeeIceMan]

What about combining the primary and secondary apps into one application? I wouldn't remove parts of either section, instead just send everthing in together. Obviously, this would never happen, but could it be done? Is there a reason to have them separated that isn't based on making more money or screening out a few people. Not really advocating for this, but the thought just crossed my mind, so I thought I would throw it out there.

 

[kpcrew]

Well the average applicant applies to about 14 or 15 schools. Even if you cut the number of applications to 7, the waitlist problem will still be there since the number of interview slots won't change. There will just be fewer people vying for each one, so waitlist size won't be affected significantly.

 

[gettheleadout]

I'd rather be treated as a number.

Why? Do you think the product of your life experience can be reduced to a number?

 

[Frazier]

Well the average applicant applies to about 14 or 15 schools. Even if you cut the number of applications to 7, the waitlist problem will still be there since the number of interview slots won't change. There will just be fewer people vying for each one, so waitlist size won't be affected significantly.

Yea, I'm not so sure... Decrease the amount of apps a school receives by say 50%, I'm sure they will be decreasing their interview slots. Narrower pool to choose from, less volume of people will be of interest. I mean, we all know how "particular" schools are for perfect "fits".

 

[notbobtrustme]

I'd get rid of the EC garbage. There's so much bull**** involved and adcoms seem to be absolutely clueless to what most of these ECs really mean.

Clinical Volunteering -> reading a book in the ER inbetween trucking a patient to diagnostic radiology ever 40 minutes.

Non-clinical volunteering -> ladling soup. Even better, nothing, but put down your best friend as a contact and pretend to have done something.

Treasurer/President/VP of xyz-club -> Buying baked goods at grocery store, selling them back for a dollar a piece, using profits to buy beer and pizza to get girls drunk so you can bang them.

Founding a non-profit -> filling out the paper, sitting on the non-profit to amp up application.

medical trip overseas -> vacation overseas.

research -> washing dishes. bonus points if you get lucky and pick a lab that publishes a paper during your 8 week stint in the lab, so you can put down that you are published.

 

[zeppelinpage4]

I think there should be a limit on the amount of schools people can apply to in a given cycle. Of course, this will never happen because there is just too much money to be made by the big players in the game.

...But limiting each applicant to 12 schools would really streamline the process, I'd imagine, from the first step of verification (some people are getting secondaries, some aren't. Common reason: schools have to verify all the apps they got. just wait it out.) through the ending stages of the waitlists (what often comes with tons of applicants? a huge waitlist. Just ask anyone that applied to Rochester before lol).

The current rule of "apply broadly" would be more in line with "apply within your scope of competition".

From the applicant side, we would be forced to apply more realistically, and, while we might have to bear the burden of making less "hail mary applications", the benefit would rest in saved funds, saved time, saved stress and saved uncertainty.

👍

I just have to let you know that almost every one of your posts that I've come across has either made a lot of sense and contained good advice or made me chuckle.

This one did both. I'm one of the idiots who have no self control when selecting school. I mean I'm probably gonna follow through with applying to Harvard. I have no reason to, but that little 0.000000000000000000000000000001% chance of acceptance will bother me until I am complete at the school. A forced limit might be nice. Although I'd probably set it around 16.

 

[gettheleadout]

I'd get rid of the EC garbage. There's so much bull**** involved and adcoms seem to be absolutely clueless to what most of these ECs really mean.

Clinical Volunteering -> reading a book in the ER inbetween trucking a patient to diagnostic radiology ever 40 minutes.

Non-clinical volunteering -> ladling soup. Even better, nothing, but put down your best friend as a contact and pretend to have done something.

Treasurer/President/VP of xyz-club -> Buying baked goods at grocery store, selling them back for a dollar a piece, using profits to buy beer and pizza to get girls drunk so you can bang them.

Founding a non-profit -> filling out the paper, sitting on the non-profit to amp up application.

medical trip overseas -> vacation overseas.

research -> washing dishes. bonus points if you get lucky and pick a lab that publishes a paper during your 8 week stint in the lab, so you can put down that you are published.

Dude, you seriously have a jaded and distorted view of this process.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN Mobile

 

[Miss Terious]

I'd get rid of the EC garbage. There's so much bull**** involved and adcoms seem to be absolutely clueless to what most of these ECs really mean.

Clinical Volunteering -> reading a book in the ER inbetween trucking a patient to diagnostic radiology ever 40 minutes.

Non-clinical volunteering -> ladling soup. Even better, nothing, but put down your best friend as a contact and pretend to have done something.

Treasurer/President/VP of xyz-club -> Buying baked goods at grocery store, selling them back for a dollar a piece, using profits to buy beer and pizza to get girls drunk so you can bang them.

Founding a non-profit -> filling out the paper, sitting on the non-profit to amp up application.

medical trip overseas -> vacation overseas.

research -> washing dishes. bonus points if you get lucky and pick a lab that publishes a paper during your 8 week stint in the lab, so you can put down that you are published.

I agree with a lot of that cynical rant actually. There's so much resume padding through this entire process. It can be a load of BS a lot of the times.

I understand the need for sympathetic and empathetic physicians with a decent background in some form of clinical volunteering but a lot of the other EC requirements are so subjective with little to no guarantee that they'll actually compensate for anything on your application (there may be a few success stories on here though).

Sent from my phone! Blame it on the a-a-autocorrect.

 

[gettheleadout]

They're not supposed to compensate for anything; you're expected to be a competent student independent of your EC's and life experiences.

Research isn't required for medical school, leadership isn't required, clinical experience is and with good reason, and non-clinical volunteering isn't required.

Good grades (you can work diligently and are reasonably intelligent), good MCAT (you're reasonably intelligent in relation to people from other schools and capable of passing the boards), an articulated reason for wanting to go into medicine and proof that you've tried to experience what it would be like (decent PS and clinical experience/shadowing), and evidence that you did something productive with some of your free time in college are all that are that are required.

Volunteer gig like Bob described exist and suck, and that is unfortunate. That doesn't mean that they're all like that and it definitely doesn't mean the good ones can't be of benefit to an aspiring physician.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN Mobile

 

[Xenops]

The need to demonstrate cultural competence. I understand for a white privileged suburbanite it might be necessary to an extent to show they can interact with others, but for a lot of people it is simply not necessary. If you are from any kind of city or urban background, you will likely interact with lots of people outside your cultural comfort zone every single day, and you are probably much better at doing so than any of your future medical school peers. The need to have an activity to demonstrate that is so friggin lame.

My problem is that I grew up in an ultra-white, mostly Mormon region. I had NO experience with cultures, even different races, until I was 23 years old. The first time I actually had African-Americans friends was in 2010, and I found out these people are delightful! 😀 So, sorry, I disagree.

Add: more math. Calc III, Calc IV, linear algebra, etc

I would die.😱 One of the main reasons I'm NOT applying to PhD/MD programs

And I also have to validate the need for EC's, since that is the only way that applicants can make themselves stand out (me).

So the only thing I would change is to be more forgiving about the GPA.

 

[Sephiroth]

I'd get rid of the EC garbage. There's so much bull**** involved and adcoms seem to be absolutely clueless to what most of these ECs really mean.

Clinical Volunteering -> reading a book in the ER inbetween trucking a patient to diagnostic radiology ever 40 minutes.

Non-clinical volunteering -> ladling soup. Even better, nothing, but put down your best friend as a contact and pretend to have done something.

Treasurer/President/VP of xyz-club -> Buying baked goods at grocery store, selling them back for a dollar a piece, using profits to buy beer and pizza to get girls drunk so you can bang them.

Founding a non-profit -> filling out the paper, sitting on the non-profit to amp up application.

medical trip overseas -> vacation overseas.

research -> washing dishes. bonus points if you get lucky and pick a lab that publishes a paper during your 8 week stint in the lab, so you can put down that you are published.

Dude, you seriously have a jaded and distorted view of this process.

I agree with a lot of that cynical rant actually.

"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw


I understand what you mean in your more recent post, gtlo, but there's just soooooo much bullsht that we all see in this whole process, and it seems like a lot of adcoms just eat it up (the mere existence of the "why our school" secondary question is unquestionable proof that adcoms like to be bullsh*tted to), its hard not to be a little cynical.

 

[JESSFALLING]

In all seriousness, that or they shouldn't require you to go by your parent's income if you're not a dependent.http://forums.studentdoctor.net/editpost.php?do=editpost&p=12758415

No kidding!

 

[circulus vitios]

Why? Do you think the product of your life experience can be reduced to a number?

I hate doing extra curricular activities. The application process is turning into a freak-show i.e. who has the most unique and interesting extracurricular activities. Limit the selection criteria to GPA, MCAT, and basic career exposure like shadowing. Treat me as a number. It's less painful and than wasting hundreds of hours of my life on idiotic boxchecking. I'm not going to do extracurriculars that I'm "passionate" about. Everything I list on my application is something that I hate. I don't have any "passions," but what I do enjoy doesn't involve volunteering or clubs.

 

[gettheleadout]

I hate doing extra curricular activities. The application process is turning into a freak-show i.e. who has the most unique and interesting extracurricular activities. Limit the selection criteria to GPA, MCAT, and basic career exposure like shadowing. Treat me as a number. It's less painful and than wasting hundreds of hours of my life on idiotic boxchecking. I'm not going to do extracurriculars that I'm "passionate" about. Everything I list on my application is something that I hate. I don't have any "passions," but what I do enjoy doesn't involve volunteering or clubs.

So then everything beyond those criteria would have to be irrelevant? Unfortunately for you other people have passions that can translate into starting successful businesses, raising tons of money for charity, changing the lives of others, etc. and these speak to their character and what type of person they are. A physician is just a person after all, and personal qualities are important and can be best gauges by actions. It's not realistic to pretend that ignoring these would be smart, fair, or in the best interest of patients. Think numbers can tell you how good of a physician you'll be?


Sent from my iPhone using SDN Mobile

 

[circulus vitios]

So then everything beyond those criteria would have to be irrelevant? Unfortunately for you other people have passions that can translate into starting successful businesses, raising tons of money for charity, changing the lives of others, etc. and these speak to their character and what type of person they are. A physician is just a person after all, and personal qualities are important and can be best gauges by actions. It's not realistic to pretend that ignoring these would be smart, fair, or in the best interest of patients. Think numbers can tell you how good of a physician you'll be?


Sent from my iPhone using SDN Mobile

Numbers can't predict the quality of a physician and neither can extracurricular activities. Numbers can, however, predict if a pre-med is capable of becoming a physician. Even with the extracurricular freakshow in full swing, medical schools still place great emphasis on GPA and MCAT. Medical school is academically tough and, as a result, the national average is a 3.63/32 and not a 3.33/26.

edit: And I've never understood the public's fascination with "beside manner." Medical results are governed by medicine and not by physician personability. I've had cold, distant physicians treat me. It doesn't bother me. I see a physician because I'm sick, not because I want to make friends.

 

[drizzt3117]

Given how delightful your personality appears in this thread, being treated as a # would probably be a good thing for you.

I don't think many of the premeds here understand what goes into the selection process and how detailed it is. It's not arbitrary although it may seem that way from the outside.

Btw, I agree about secondaries, if they don't need them for residency they shouldn't need them for med school.

I hate doing extra curricular activities. The application process is turning into a freak-show i.e. who has the most unique and interesting extracurricular activities. Limit the selection criteria to GPA, MCAT, and basic career exposure like shadowing. Treat me as a number. It's less painful and than wasting hundreds of hours of my life on idiotic boxchecking. I'm not going to do extracurriculars that I'm "passionate" about. Everything I list on my application is something that I hate. I don't have any "passions," but what I do enjoy doesn't involve volunteering or clubs.

 

[AllDay24]

This thread is a trap! It's the essay question for USC and you just fed him answers...

 

[TheMightySmiter]

I feel bad for you guys who are all doing ECs you hate. You can quit anytime and find better ones. I hated bench research so much that I quit after one semester, but was totally candid about why I quit in my apps and interviews. I hated hospital volunteering, too, thought it was a waste of my time, so I quit that and got a real job in a hospital. Everything worked out for me in the end. The problem with most pre-meds here is that they have no imagination; you all think you have to do a) hospital volunteering, b) bench research, c) president of AMSA, whatever. Well if you don't like those things, don't do them! Me, my only real research experience was health policy research, I got leadership in a political organization that I felt strongly about, I volunteered as kitchen lead in a homeless shelter which I thought was awesome. I know people who got their volunteering hours by teaching disabled kids how to snowboard. Awesome! Totally fun, and something interesting to talk about. You guys complaining about ECs are only jaded because you can't seem to think outside your little pre-med boxes.

This thread is a trap! It's the essay question for USC and you just fed him answers...

Hey, Admiral Ackbar, read the whole thread.

 

[circulus vitios]

I feel bad for you guys who are all doing ECs you hate. You can quit anytime and find better ones. I hated bench research so much that I quit after one semester, but was totally candid about why I quit in my apps and interviews. I hated hospital volunteering, too, thought it was a waste of my time, so I quit that and got a real job in a hospital. Everything worked out for me in the end. The problem with most pre-meds here is that they have no imagination; you all think you have to do a) hospital volunteering, b) bench research, c) president of AMSA, whatever. Well if you don't like those things, don't do them! Me, my only real research experience was health policy research, I got leadership in a political organization that I felt strongly about, I volunteered as kitchen lead in a homeless shelter which I thought was awesome. I know people who got their volunteering hours by teaching disabled kids how to snowboard. Awesome! Totally fun, and something interesting to talk about. You guys complaining about ECs are only jaded because you can't seem to think outside your little pre-med boxes.



Hey, Admiral Ackbar, read the whole thread.

Your alternatives are not possible for most people. There is one "major" hospital within 30 miles of my home. I'd like to get a real job at this hospital but I haven't been able to find any entry-level jobs that require no certification. Even certified jobs (e.g. CNA, EMT, MA, etc.) are rarely listed, not there there are any CNA, EMT, MA, etc. classes within a fifty mile radius of where I live. I'm reduced to working for free, doing crap like "reading a book in the ER inbetween trucking a patient to diagnostic radiology ever 40 minutes."

 

[Frazier]

👍

I just have to let you know that almost every one of your posts that I've come across has either made a lot of sense and contained good advice or made me chuckle.

This one did both. I'm one of the idiots who have no self control when selecting school. I mean I'm probably gonna follow through with applying to Harvard. I have no reason to, but that little 0.000000000000000000000000000001% chance of acceptance will bother me until I am complete at the school. A forced limit might be nice. Although I'd probably set it around 16.

Thank you, my friend.
Next rounds on me.

 

[Elevencents]

It just seems people on here are always out to call other people trolls/ expose them when they're not doing anything underhanded. Typicaly premed stuff. Makes me upset.

This.

 

[music2doc]

Add:
Verification of ECs
Greater admissions transparency requirements

Remove:
Secondary fees
Pre-Med committees
Caribbean schools (nuk'em...or just get rid of the US licensing options...yeah, that latter option might be best)
E-mails, mail, etc. from Caribbean schools
E-mails, mail, etc. from schools wanting to attract you into their other health programs (in addition to/instead of the medical school -- esp. AFTER you withdraw from their medical school)

 

[Dmr6186]

I feel bad for you guys who are all doing ECs you hate. You can quit anytime and find better ones. I hated bench research so much that I quit after one semester, but was totally candid about why I quit in my apps and interviews. I hated hospital volunteering, too, thought it was a waste of my time, so I quit that and got a real job in a hospital.

That's actually a lot more easier said than done. I have extensive hospital and EMT experience, and even for me, I still have a hard time finding a job that pays more than the previous one. But, I think you open a lot of doors to yourself by showing ample interest in your clinical volunteering so supervisors take note of you. That's how I got my job in the hospital.

However, a lot of the cynicism is true. The volunteers in the ER at my hospital, both high schoolers and college pre-meds, just stand around and look like they have no idea what they're doing. There's a lot to do, but they really don't care. As long as they rack up the hours, that's all that matters to them.

Same goes with most of the ECs. Most pre-meds do them because they have to. I'll admit, I've done some ECs with that mindset.. that's just the game you gotta play. But most of my ECs I've done even before thinking of medical school. They should really be things you want to do instead of sitting on your ass watching TV all day... or browsing SDN 😀 I think most adcoms know it's BS. But they want to see that you did something other than study for classes. I mean, if it weren't for tutoring, I wouldn't have met my lovely girlfriend (Note: I do NOT hit on my students when teaching them lol. Some things just happen!). To me, it's basically a parent's way of forcing their kid to go outside and play, make friends, and get hurt instead of playing video games!

Ok, so, more on-topic. I would make the screening process a lot more challenging, sending out secondaries to people that are legit candidates to that school. I heard in the old days this way so. Now it's used simply as a money-maker. "Check this box if you want to go here and send a check for $100." Um, YES, because that's why I paid tons of money to you in the first place for the primary app!!!!!!!!!! A joke.
I would also add a significant amount more seats to allow entry of more applicants in... either by building more schools, letting more people in a school, or something. But I know that will never happen either because the less med schools grads there are, the less doctors there are, which means more patients for the few doctors out there, which means more $$$ for those doctors.

 

[music2doc]

I feel bad for you guys who are all doing ECs you hate. You can quit anytime and find better ones. I hated bench research so much that I quit after one semester, but was totally candid about why I quit in my apps and interviews. I hated hospital volunteering, too, thought it was a waste of my time, so I quit that and got a real job in a hospital. Everything worked out for me in the end. The problem with most pre-meds here is that they have no imagination; you all think you have to do a) hospital volunteering, b) bench research, c) president of AMSA, whatever. Well if you don't like those things, don't do them! Me, my only real research experience was health policy research, I got leadership in a political organization that I felt strongly about, I volunteered as kitchen lead in a homeless shelter which I thought was awesome. I know people who got their volunteering hours by teaching disabled kids how to snowboard. Awesome! Totally fun, and something interesting to talk about. You guys complaining about ECs are only jaded because you can't seem to think outside your little pre-med boxes.



Hey, Admiral Ackbar, read the whole thread.

Agreed.

Your alternatives are not possible for most people. There is one "major" hospital within 30 miles of my home. I'd like to get a real job at this hospital but I haven't been able to find any entry-level jobs that require no certification. Even certified jobs (e.g. CNA, EMT, MA, etc.) are rarely listed, not there there are any CNA, EMT, MA, etc. classes within a fifty mile radius of where I live. I'm reduced to working for free, doing crap like "reading a book in the ER inbetween trucking a patient to diagnostic radiology ever 40 minutes."

Honestly, you don't need a major hospital to get some clinical or solid volunteer experience. Go find someone who is trained/certified in some area of medicine/nursing (EMT, LPN, RN, PA-C, MD, DO, exercise phys, etc.) and work with them to establish a health screening program every Sat. morning in front of the local Walmart. Go to local schools and volunteer your time. Go see what the local YMCA needs for their youth, military, or other special populations served....

Basically, be a bit more resourceful. If you settle for **** in the ED, you shouldn't expect anything more than that. Good opportunities require effort, resourcefulness, leadership, etc. From the students I met at interviews, the vast majority had interesting ECs -- ECs they were passionate about. If you hate what you're doing, find something else to do.

 

[kpcrew]

I feel bad for you guys who are all doing ECs you hate. You can quit anytime and find better ones. I hated bench research so much that I quit after one semester, but was totally candid about why I quit in my apps and interviews. I hated hospital volunteering, too, thought it was a waste of my time, so I quit that and got a real job in a hospital. Everything worked out for me in the end. The problem with most pre-meds here is that they have no imagination; you all think you have to do a) hospital volunteering, b) bench research, c) president of AMSA, whatever. Well if you don't like those things, don't do them! Me, my only real research experience was health policy research, I got leadership in a political organization that I felt strongly about, I volunteered as kitchen lead in a homeless shelter which I thought was awesome. I know people who got their volunteering hours by teaching disabled kids how to snowboard. Awesome! Totally fun, and something interesting to talk about. You guys complaining about ECs are only jaded because you can't seem to think outside your little pre-med boxes.



Hey, Admiral Ackbar, read the whole thread.

Legitimate criticism but can you blame people when they have those categories to fill out in the application?

 

[gettheleadout]

Numbers can't predict the quality of a physician and neither can extracurricular activities. Numbers can, however, predict if a pre-med is capable of becoming a physician. Even with the extracurricular freakshow in full swing, medical schools still place great emphasis on GPA and MCAT. Medical school is academically tough and, as a result, the national average is a 3.63/32 and not a 3.33/26.

edit: And I've never understood the public's fascination with "beside manner." Medical results are governed by medicine and not by physician personability. I've had cold, distant physicians treat me. It doesn't bother me. I see a physician because I'm sick, not because I want to make friends.

There's more to selecting an applicant than determining if they can cut it or not. Is this someone who is adaptable, resourceful, independent, motivated, etc.? One's experiences and accomplishments speak to things like this. Is this someone who I would be comfortable working with? Do they take the lead in team environments and make the most of their own and others' potential? It's not hard to understand why the application process works the way it does; I agree with drizzt that people that think it's a crapshoot just don't understand what's going on.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN Mobile

 

[qwerty2012]

Everything. We should be able to go wherever we wanted to go. If everyone wants to go to HMS then everyone should be able to.

 

[notbobtrustme]

That doesn't mean that they're all like that and it definitely doesn't mean the good ones can't be of benefit to an aspiring physician.

Requiring volunteering from pre-meds is like forcing MBA students to work as a cashier at a Shell gas station.

The benefit may be there, but it's so small and so tangential that it's essentially worthless for >99% of all students.

 

[KnuxNole]

Keep in mind that some people that do ECs would never even think of doing it if it wasn't for the med school application. Factor in all the people that stop doing the EC once they get an acceptance letter as well.

Basically, it's a bunch of hoops that people try not to sigh and think is lame and just do it. A lot of people genuinely like volunteering, research, etc, which is a GOOD thing...don't feel bad if you like these things and read posts bashing ECs. Like it was also mentioned, if you find activities you enjoy, regardless of if it has any clinical meaning to it, you can put it as an EC. All of my ECs except for one were non-clinical.

But, some of what notbob said is sorta true:

Clinical volunteering. Useful and I would say its very good to get some exposure. But like mentioned, ER volunteers look bored as hell, and have the idea that they would get to suture a lac or intubate during their time.

Medical trips - The few people I knew who did this seemed to take 200+ pictures of them drinking cervezas and posting pics kissing their classmates 😱

President of club - The ones that actually care and do things are good. The ones that say they are, but don't do anything are kinda lame. Also, a lot of people only go to one meeting and put down they are a member for 3 years, lol

Also, ECs do NOT always prove someone has good qualities in life. There can be people that do lots of unique ECs, who have NO leadership qualities, no motivation, not even close to independent, etc.

 

[TheMightySmiter]

Your alternatives are not possible for most people. There is one "major" hospital within 30 miles of my home. I'd like to get a real job at this hospital but I haven't been able to find any entry-level jobs that require no certification. Even certified jobs (e.g. CNA, EMT, MA, etc.) are rarely listed, not there there are any CNA, EMT, MA, etc. classes within a fifty mile radius of where I live. I'm reduced to working for free, doing crap like "reading a book in the ER inbetween trucking a patient to diagnostic radiology ever 40 minutes."

That's actually a lot more easier said than done. I have extensive hospital and EMT experience, and even for me, I still have a hard time finding a job that pays more than the previous one. But, I think you open a lot of doors to yourself by showing ample interest in your clinical volunteering so supervisors take note of you. That's how I got my job in the hospital.

Well, my point wasn't that everyone should go run off and get a job in a hospital to get an exciting clinical experience. Sometimes, my job sucks and I envy the volunteers who only have to deliver meal trays and chat with patients while I have to go clean someone up because they crapped their pants after getting too much Miralax. My point was that pre-meds should be proactive about finding more interesting clinical experience/research/volunteering/whatever. It wasn't a cakewalk for me to get a job in a hospital. I had two years of volunteer EMT experience and it still took me months of filling out dozens of job applications--I finally got ONE job interview and it was at a hospital 45 minutes away from me. Eventually, after working there for almost two years, I had enough experience and recommendations to get a job in a hospital closer to me. I am only giving my situation as an example of someone who had an interesting and valuable clinical experience after lots of trial and error. I am certainly not saying everyone should go out and do exactly what I did. But you have to utilize the contacts you have, do a lot of searching, and have a lot of patience.

 

[gettheleadout]

Requiring volunteering from pre-meds is like forcing MBA students to work as a cashier at a Shell gas station.

The benefit may be there, but it's so small and so tangential that it's essentially worthless for >99% of all students.

Greater than ninety-nine percent, eh? Yeah, that sounds like a reliable statistic. Again, volunteering isn't required.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN Mobile

 

[circulus vitios]

Greater than ninety-nine percent, eh? Yeah, that sounds like a reliable statistic. Again, volunteering isn't required.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN Mobile

And neither are good grades, as so many medical schools say that they "have no minimum GPA." But guess what the reality is?

 

[typicalindian]

I'd rather be treated as a number.

You sound like a fun individual. I'd love to have you as my doctor.

 

[gettheleadout]

And neither are good grades, as so many medical schools say that they "have no minimum GPA." But guess what the reality is?

If you do things you don't enjoy because you think are required based on what everyone else, that's no one's fault but your own. Good grades are a direct, reasonable indicator of academic performance. Volunteering, like any other experience, speaks to personal life experience, interests, achievement, or personal values. It's not something to be compared between applicants by number of hours or any other metric which can be as directly compared as GPA.

 

[Frazier]

You sound like a fun individual. I'd love to have you as my doctor.

burnett ftw

 

[aspiringdoc09]

Didn't read the thread. If I was over it, I would get rid of the Course Section where you have to manually input every class, credit, and grade. That is a ridiculous process. What is the point of paying for and sending transcripts to them? They still have to enter the data in themselves, so why do we have to go through that annoying process?! It's insanity!

 

[circulus vitios]

You sound like a fun individual. I'd love to have you as my doctor.

I'll make a terrible doctor because I prefer an admissions system with selection criteria based on hard numbers and basic exposure to the profession, rather than "demonstrated passion?" Oh, okay.

 

[gettheleadout]

I'll make a terrible doctor because I prefer an admissions system with selection criteria based on hard numbers and basic exposure to the profession, rather than "demonstrated passion?" Oh, okay.

No, you prefer an unrealistic one that ignores everything but hard numbers and basic exposure. You think the current system doesn't place enough weight on hard numbers? Here's a question for you, what happens when a school gets 500 applicants with 3.9+ GPA's and 38+ MCAT scores for 150 spots? Even giving out 300 acceptances (as all schools overaccept) how do you suppose the school should choose the applicants to accept? Simply by numbers? Okay, so everyone with a 4.0 and 45 gets the first acceptance and go on down the line. You then end up with classes at the top schools were everyone is very homogeneous and scoring very highly and performing very well academically, but what does that say about these people? Are they good people? What makes the applicant with a 4.0 and a 42 more deserving than the applicant with a 3.9 and a 40? Assume they've all shadowed enough to have a reasonable, broad grasp of the field of medicine, and beyond that you get into an hours-competition even more ludicrous than what premeds already have in their minds. Do another 100 hours of shadowing over another applicant outweigh a certain point difference on the MCAT or in a GPA?

The whole idea is insane and impractical.

 

[circulus vitios]

No, you prefer an unrealistic one that ignores everything but hard numbers and basic exposure. You think the current system doesn't place enough weight on hard numbers? Here's a question for you, what happens when a school gets 500 applicants with 3.9+ GPA's and 38+ MCAT scores for 150 spots? Even giving out 300 acceptances (as all schools overaccept) how do you suppose the school should choose the applicants to accept? Simply by numbers? Okay, so everyone with a 4.0 and 45 gets the first acceptance and go on down the line. You then end up with classes at the top schools were everyone is very homogeneous and scoring very highly and performing very well academically, but what does that say about these people? Are they good people? What makes the applicant with a 4.0 and a 42 more deserving than the applicant with a 3.9 and a 40? Assume they've all shadowed enough to have a reasonable, broad grasp of the field of medicine, and beyond that you get into an hours-competition even more ludicrous than what premeds already have in their minds. Do another 100 hours of shadowing over another applicant outweigh a certain point difference on the MCAT or in a GPA?

The whole idea is insane and impractical.

I want a system that selects students based on GPA, MCAT, and career exposure (shadowing) selection criteria. Schools would clearly publish their average matriculant statistics and clearly outline any minimums for GPA, MCAT, and shadowing. Schools would, as they currently do, create a desired class profile. The class would have so many students within several GPA/MCAT ranges. Each GPA/MCAT range would have targets for so many URM students, so many economically disadvantaged students, so many students with a regional tie, etc. Applicants who fall within each GPA/MCAT stratification would then be randomly selected for interviewing. Interviews would be given to see if the student is reasonably articulate, not incredibly socially awkward, etc. -- basic social qualities that a physician should have.

I'd rather be a victim of random rejection than the victim of an admissions committee member deciding that he doesn't see enough commitment/altruism/any other arbitrarily subjective quality in my application.

You insist that the admissions system is anything but a crap-shoot, yet the system is anything but transparent. I've never seen a school explicitly list minimums for subjective activities like shadowing and volunteering, yet I've seen physician assistant programs clearly require x amount of hours spent shadowing.

 

[Sephiroth]

Interviews would be given to see if the student is reasonably articulate, not incredibly socially awkward, etc. -- basic social qualities that a physician should have.

This part resonated with me. It was brought up in another thread a while back (actually, it may have been one I started) about how flawed interviewers can be in learning anything significant [or accurate] about someone from an interview. Personally, I think the interview should just have a few check boxes for: Is this person socially incompetent? Does this person appear disingenuous? Can this person articulate themselves to a satisfactory level? Does this person have a reason why they want yo be a doctor? All yes/no questions, and as long as you get N, N, Y, Y that's it, because I think that's the most you could realistically hope to ACCURATELY get out of an interview. Of course that will never be the case - people fancy themselves such great objective interviewers and schools (and businesses) need an easy out in a super-subjective format to account for any decision they make.

 

[09ine]

I agree with changing up the interview process. As long as the person can speak English and talk like a normal individual and not a 4.0 robot they should be good enough. I don't think interviewers should base their decisions on if someone answers a question "incorrectly." Interviewers should be able to spot the people that pad their application with fluff too.

 

[gettheleadout]

I want a system that selects students based on GPA, MCAT, and career exposure (shadowing) selection criteria. Schools would clearly publish their average matriculant statistics and clearly outline any minimums for GPA, MCAT, and shadowing. Schools would, as they currently do, create a desired class profile. The class would have so many students within several GPA/MCAT ranges. Each GPA/MCAT range would have targets for so many URM students, so many economically disadvantaged students, so many students with a regional tie, etc. Applicants who fall within each GPA/MCAT stratification would then be randomly selected for interviewing. Interviews would be given to see if the student is reasonably articulate, not incredibly socially awkward, etc. -- basic social qualities that a physician should have.

I'd rather be a victim of random rejection than the victim of an admissions committee member deciding that he doesn't see enough commitment/altruism/any other arbitrarily subjective quality in my application.

You insist that the admissions system is anything but a crap-shoot, yet the system is anything but transparent. I've never seen a school explicitly list minimums for subjective activities like shadowing and volunteering, yet I've seen physician assistant programs clearly require x amount of hours spent shadowing.

You want to make a process you believe is a crapshoot into a literal crapshoot!

Not being random and not being transparent are not mutually exclusive. I don't know how to get across any better than I've tried how life experiences (regardless of age) are important in judging whether you want to invest the time, money, and effort in educating someone, whether you would actually want this person representing your school, your hospital system, or your profession, whether you would actually want to work with this person, whether you think they can provide a unique perspective in problem solving, whether they work well with others in the team environment that is medicine, etc...

I don't know what to say anymore. I'm glad it's up to people who are physicians, educate them, or work with them to determine what qualities are valuable in future physicians.

 

[drizzt3117]

You should move to Asia then, their med school admissions are numbers only. Too bad you're admitted out of HS.

 

[circulus vitios]

You want to make a process you believe is a crapshoot into a literal crapshoot!

Random selection based on well-defined hard numbers and career exposure versus random selection based on hard numbers and subjective activities. There is a difference. 🙂

 

[drizzt3117]

I suggest you guys who think the current system is broken volunteer for your school's adcom if you're ever accepted. I think it'll be an enlightening experience.

Random selection based on well-defined hard numbers and career exposure versus random selection based on hard numbers and subjective activities. There is a difference. 🙂

 

[typicalindian]

Random selection based on well-defined hard numbers and career exposure versus random selection based on hard numbers and subjective activities. There is a difference. 🙂

 

[KnuxNole]

Life experiences and volunteering don't always show people's critical thinking ability, judgment, teamwork or strong characters. Although they can imply that, which is good for people who don't have that ability, and can use ECs to mask it. And if you have those abilities, it's an "easy" way to show it without writing a 10-page essay. Even if all you do in volunteering is clean poop, it could at least appear to people that it is an amazing character feat. It's all about how you use that experience and manipulate it to your liking 🙂